Thursday, October 30, 2014

VIDEO SERIES: The Changing Role of Education in America



The Changing Role of Education in America

Hoosiers, like those in a number of other states, have been stuck indoors the last few days, due to record-breaking temperatures and snow.  Many have likely put away their Christmas decorations and exhausted projects in the home, which makes this a perfect time to watch some of the videos from the Common Core conference that was held at the University of Notre Dame this past September.  This all-day conference, entitled “The Changing Role of Education in America: Consequences of Common Core,” brought together leading experts from around the country to peel back the many layers Common Core.  We are particularly grateful to  American Principles Project for putting this conference together, as well as to the co-sponsors of the event, the Pioneer Institute and the Heartland Institute.  We also are grateful to Professor Gerald V. Bradley, who made having the conference at Notre Dame possible, as well as to the numerous speakers who participated.

A “high-lights” video of the conference can be seen here.  Since watching the video of the entire conference in one sitting would be nearly impossible, below are links to the individual speeches in the order they were given.  We hope this makes it easier for our readers to copy, paste, and share a particular speech with an individual, with whom they think a certain subject matter would be of interest.

 
“The Purpose of Eduction in America”
Sean F. Fieler, Chairman, American Principles Project
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adu2LONpVs0&index=2&list=SPamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Common Core Restricts States’ Rights”
Emmett McGroarty – Senior Fellow, American Principles Project
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyHvDII8h5E&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Education and America’s Founding Principles”
Dr. Patrick Denneen – Professor of Constitutional Studies, University of Notre Dame
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl5tbJTds5o&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“The History of Education in America”
Dr. Williamson Evers – Research Fellow, Hoover Institution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTigY60yvNA&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Common Core and Data Collection”
Jane Robbins – Senior Fellow, American Principles Project
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYnteSxVMjw&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“The Federal Role in Education”
Dr. Williamson Evers – Research Fellow, Hoover Institution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfCf0QGaQv0&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Federal Intrusion in the Classroom”
Joy Pullman – Fellow, The Heartland Institute
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LA53_0klb6c&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Common Core’s Effect on Higher Education”
Dr. James Milgram – Professor of Mathematics Emeritus, Stanford University
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lY0qzNbnbc&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Common Core’s Effects on Math Education”
Dr. James Milgram – Professor of Mathematics Emeritus, Stanford University
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuexIMWBOQY&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Common Core is Developmentally Inappropriate”
Dr. Megan Koschnick – Clinical Psychologist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tSQlJE6VuA&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Invalid Process of Common Core Development”
Dr. Sandra Stotsky – Common Core ELA Validation Committee Member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuHGhQJDre4&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Common Core English Language Arts Standards”
Dr. Sandra Stotsky – Common Core ELA Validation Committee Member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7Gyocw3Be4&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Common Core and the Destruction of Literature”
Dr. Terrence Moore – Assistant Professor of History, Hillsdale College
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HexXAf6MuN0&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Inadequate Research Base of Common Core”
Ze’ev Wurman – Visiting Scholar, Hoover Institution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwMjuQoYzc0&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Parent Reaction to Common Core”
Heather Crossin – Co-founder, Hoosiers Against Common Core
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9TToxAxwkw&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Parent Reaction to Common Core”
Erin Tuttle – Co-founder, Hoosiers Against Common Core
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpXUIRo91J4&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Common Core and Private & Homeschools
William Estrada – Director of Federal Relations, Homeschool Legal Defense Fund
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnZ7npSkVWQ&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Why Literature is Essential in Education”
Andrew Kern – Founder & President, CIRCE Institute
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3IXHhy1qOc&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“The Importance of Reading Fiction”
Dr. Keith Oatley – Professor, University of Toronto
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjZ876c9QU8&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1
 
“Common Core and School Choice”
Jamie Gass – Director of the Center for School Reform, Pioneer Institute
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SQx7hAAZOk&list=PLamKNWBeuEBQWBxplBozOId12_BzsknZ1


R

DR. JAMES DOBSON: common core

The Problem with Common Core 2

Oct 28

Web Extras

  • Building The Machine Website
  • Common Core: The Government's Classroom Website
  • Bonhoeffer by Eric Metaxes Website
  • Liberty Unyielding Website
  • Parents and Educators Against Common Core Website
  • Heartland Institute Website
  • Pioneer Institute Website
  • Homeschool Legal Defense Association Website
  • Truth in American EducationWebsite
  • National Eucation Data Model – 400 Plus Attributes Website

PART 1 | PART 2 | PART 3

What’s the big deal with Common Core? Or is it a big deal? Isn’t the government just trying to make sure our kids get a good education? On the next edition of Family Talk, Dr. James Dobson interviews a panel of administrators about the problem with common core.

Elizabeth Berg has been involved in education for 30 years — she’s been a teacher, researcher, curriculum developer, and has now been a principal for the past 9 years.

Cindee Will has been a principal for a little over a year. Before that she was an assistant principal for 8 years, and then for 10 years before that was a teacher and teacher trainer. Cindee has also received many awards and distinctions including a local teacher of the year award in 2003, and a School of Excellence award for the school years of 2010 - 2011, 2011 - 2012, and 2012 - 2013.

Deborah Cole has been involved in the charter school movement in Colorado Springs for 20 years, including as a founder and board member of a local charter academy here. She has also been a consultant, and at one point in her career worked in the Congressional offices on Capitol Hill.



Sent from my iPhone

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

DR. JAMES DOBSON: common core

The Problem with Common Core 2

Oct 28

Web Extras

  • Building The Machine Website
  • Common Core: The Government's Classroom Website
  • Bonhoeffer by Eric Metaxes Website
  • Liberty Unyielding Website
  • Parents and Educators Against Common Core Website
  • Heartland Institute Website
  • Pioneer Institute Website
  • Homeschool Legal Defense Association Website
  • Truth in American EducationWebsite
  • National Eucation Data Model – 400 Plus Attributes Website

PART 1 | PART 2 | PART 3

What’s the big deal with Common Core? Or is it a big deal? Isn’t the government just trying to make sure our kids get a good education? On the next edition of Family Talk, Dr. James Dobson interviews a panel of administrators about the problem with common core.

Elizabeth Berg has been involved in education for 30 years — she’s been a teacher, researcher, curriculum developer, and has now been a principal for the past 9 years.

Cindee Will has been a principal for a little over a year. Before that she was an assistant principal for 8 years, and then for 10 years before that was a teacher and teacher trainer. Cindee has also received many awards and distinctions including a local teacher of the year award in 2003, and a School of Excellence award for the school years of 2010 - 2011, 2011 - 2012, and 2012 - 2013.

Deborah Cole has been involved in the charter school movement in Colorado Springs for 20 years, including as a founder and board member of a local charter academy here. She has also been a consultant, and at one point in her career worked in the Congressional offices on Capitol Hill.



Sent from my iPhone

COMMON CORE: BUILDING THE MACHINE

http://youtu.be/zjxBClx01jc

OPT OUT FORM



http://www.thomasmore.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Student-Privacy-Protection-Request-Opt-Out-Request-Form1.pdf

DISABILITIES: Coalition Wants New School Accountability

Coalition Wants New School Accountability

Education accountability should focus more on helping students, teachers and schools improve.

Parents across the country have withdrawn their children in droves  from multiple, high-stakes standardized tests. Teachers, too, are pushing back against annual student assessments that have the potential to undermine their careers. Even entire school districts are refusing to administer the pressure-packed exams, even if it means leaving federal money on the table.

When even the federal government questions whether there's too much testing, a new question surfaces: how should students, teachers and schools be held accountable?

[READ: Study: High Standardized Test Scores Don't Translate to Better Cognition]

The nation's two largest teachers unions – along with school administration organizations, business advocacy groups and school equity leaders – on Tuesday announced a new framework for accountability that focuses more on a holistic "support-and-improve" model than the longstanding "test-and-punish" mindset that's commonplace in schools nationwide.

"You need a paradigm shift to match the paradigm shift that's happened in education," says Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers. "The American Dream is slipping out of our grasp because we don't actually do the things we say are important." 

The New Accountability framework centers around making changes to three central concepts in educational accountability: standardized testing, teacher evaluation and school resource equity. While it doesn't put forth detailed recommendations for how states and local districts should proceed, the framework is intended as a foundation for future conversation, Weingarten says.  

"Everything else is changing, but the accountability system that dates back to No Child Left Behind, [and] put on steroids by Race to the Top, is pretty much this rudimentary system that simply says how the child does on an English and math test ... is the basis upon which [student, teacher and school performance] is judged," Weingarten says.

It's also not common to see sometimes opposing groups with different stakes in education banding together over a single concern.

"It really sends the message that this is a movement from all parts of the educational system, including business," says Helen Soule, executive director of the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, a group that works with business leaders and policymakers. "It's a very eclectic group of people showing that everybody is saying this is important and we really need to move the needle on this." 

Standardized testing became more common in schools after No Child Left Behind took effect more than 10 years ago, as a way to hold schools accountable for their students' performance - particularly underserved and vulnerable student populations such as special education students and English language learners. What was once championed as a way to independently measure student achievement and teacher performance in an objective way now dominates conversations about what's wrong with public schooling, even from those who initially supported the move.

[SEE ALSO: Report: Standardized Testing Debate Should Focus on Local School Districts]

Now, parents worry the frequency of testing is excessive, teachers see it as restrictive and policymakers worry the emphasis on test scores for accountability and funding purposes unintentionally prompt states to lower their educational standards. A 2013 poll from PDK International and Gallup found three-quarters of Americans think the increase in standardized testing has either hurt or had no impact on student achievement. Now, more than two-thirds of public school parents say the tests are helpful to teachers.

A broad coalition of education groups think the New Accountability framework is a start in the right direction.  In addition to the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association, administrative organizations – such as the School Superintendents Association, the National Association of Boards of Education and the National Association of Secondary School Principals – and other equity and advocacy organizations have signed a statement of support of the framework. 

Rather than advocating for an outright repeal of standardized testing, the partnering organizations say they want fewer, better tests that more accurately measure what schools and business leaders say is the most important objective for students who'll soon have to compete in the high-tech, global economy:  whether they can problem solve, work collaboratively and apply academic concepts in  different situations.

Nationwide, teachers, parents and students have been revolting against the use of standardized tests in schools. Thousands of parents have  opt out of the annual state-mandated tests – the number of students who declined to take state assessment tests in New York, for example, exploded from 10,000 in 2013 to 60,000 in 2014. In Florida's Lee County, the school board voted to reject state testing, but reversed  its decision less than a week later. The board of education in Colorado Springs was also among the first school districts to stand against assessment tests when it voted in September to opt out most of its 30,000 students, the Washington Post reported.

As of late, the opt-out movement has reached some state and federal leaders. 

Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy in September announced a plan to reduce standardized testing in schools, suggesting  that college entrance exams such as the SAT could satisfy federal requirements for school and teacher assessments. Former President Bill Clinton echoed the sentiments of many leaders at a Sept. 23 event in New York City, saying tests should be limited. 

"I think doing one in elementary school, one in the end of middle school and one before the end of high school is quite enough if you do it right," he said, according to The Huffington Post

Even Education Secretary Arne Duncan and President Barack Obama have chimed in, praising a recent announcement from the Chief Council of State School Officers and the Council of the Great City Schools that they would cut back on testing and examine their own systems to make sure the tests are meaningful. 

[MORE: Education Secretary Arne Duncan Loosens Reins on Teacher Evaluations, Testing]

"While the goals behind No Child Left Behind – promoting school accountability and closing the achievement gap – were admirable, in too many cases the law created conditions that failed to give our young people the fair shot at success they deserve," Obama said in a statement. "Too many states felt they had no choice but to lower their standards and emphasize punishing failure more than rewarding success. Too many teachers felt they had no choice but to teach to the test."

The administration also offered an olive branch to state education agencies when Duncan announced during the summer that the Department of Education would give some states an extra year of flexibility before incorporating student test scores into teacher evaluations.

"I believe testing issues today are sucking the oxygen out of the room in a lot of schools – oxygen that is needed for a healthy transition to higher standards, improved systems for data, better aligned assessments, teacher professional development, evaluation and support and more," Duncan said in August. "Too much testing can rob school buildings of joy, and cause unnecessary stress."

In order to receive waivers from certain accountability requirements under No Child Left Behind, states must implement teacher and principal evaluation systems with a greater emphasis on measures of student growth. But rather than focusing on test scores, the groups involved in proposing a new accountability framework say state and federal leaders should evaluate teacher preparation, career development and retention, according to Joseph Bishop, director of policy for the National Opportunity to Learn Campaign, an initiative of the Schott Foundation for Public Education. 


"We've been obsessed with tenure, and teachers and tests, but we totally overlook resource equity or tests that matter, ensuring we have well-prepared teachers who have been well-mentored," Bishop says. "We've been looking for shortcuts and when it comes to public education, we're not going to find them, especially when standards are being raised."

For business leaders, a concern over testing and accountability comes from a recognized need to better prepare students for careers, Soule says. 

"It's our motivation to really articulate that this is an economic issue, and a development issue in order to prepare our students for the future," Soule says. "[Businesses] want people to certainly have some knowledge, but they need people who can critically think, transfer that knowledge into multiple occupations, communicate what they are doing and collaborate across the world – and those are not even things we are measuring or testing for, or showing they are valuable." 

[RELATED: Famed Education Analysts Blast Fixation on Testing, Data]

Weingarten pointed to community-based models of education that focus on a more comprehensive approach to responsibility and accountability. The New York Performance Standards Consortium, for example, is a group of more than two dozen schools that allow students to use portfolios or capstone projects to move from grade to grade, rather than a passing grade on an annual exam. 

"You see this learning has prepared kids for college and career in a much deeper way," Weingarten says. "The notion of deeper learning, it's actually far more robust than what we're doing with the bubble-type tests."




Monday, October 27, 2014

Time for Congress to Investigate Bill Gates' Coup

Time for Congress to Investigate Bill Gates' Coup

the blog

Diane Ravitch 06/09/14 12:49 PM ET

The story about Bill Gates' swift and silent takeover of American education is startling. His role and the role of the U.S. Department of Education in drafting and imposing the Common Core standards on almost every state should be investigated by Congress.

The idea that the richest man in America can purchase and -- working closely with the U.S. Department of Education -- impose new and untested academic standards on the nation's public schools is a national scandal. A Congressional investigation is warranted.

The close involvement of Arne Duncan raises questions about whether the law was broken.

Thanks to the story in the Washington Post and to diligent bloggers, we now know that one very rich man bought the enthusiastic support of interest groups on the left and right to campaign for the Common Core.

Who knew that American education was for sale?

Who knew that federalism could so easily be dismissed as a relic of history? Who knew that Gates and Duncan, working as partners, could dismantle and destroy state and local control of education?

The revelation that education policy was shaped by one unelected man, underwriting dozens of groups. and allied with the Secretary of Education, whose staff was laced with Gates' allies, is ample reason for Congressional hearings.

I have written on various occasions (see here and here) that I could not support the Common Core standards because they were developed and imposed without regard to democratic process. The writers of the standards included no early childhood educators, no educators of children with disabilities, no experienced classroom teachers; indeed, the largest contingent of the drafting committee were representatives of the testing industry. No attempt was made to have pilot testing of the standards in real classrooms with real teachers and students. The standards do not permit any means to challenge, correct, or revise them.

In a democratic society, process matters. The high-handed manner in which these standards were written and imposed in record time makes them unacceptable. These standards not only undermine state and local control of education, but the manner in which they were written and adopted was authoritarian. No one knows how they will work, yet dozens of groups have been paid millions of dollars by the Gates Foundation to claim that they are absolutely vital for our economic future, based on no evidence whatever.

Why does state and local control matter? Until now, in education, the American idea has been that no single authority has all the answers. Local boards are best equipped to handle local problems. States set state policy, in keeping with the concept that states are "laboratories of democracy," where new ideas can evolve and prove themselves. In our federal system, the federal government has the power to protect the civil rights of students, to conduct research, and to redistribute resources to the neediest children and schools.

Do we need to compare the academic performance of students in different states? We already have the means to do so with the federally funded National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). It has been supplying state comparisons since 1992.

Will national standards improve test scores? There is no reason to believe so. Brookings scholar Tom Loveless predicted two years ago that the Common Core standards would make little or no difference. The biggest test-score gaps, he wrote, are within the same state, not between states. Some states with excellent standards have low scores, and some with excellent standards have large gaps among different groups of students.

The reality is that the most reliable predictors of test scores are family income and family education. Nearly one-quarter of America's children live in poverty. The Common Core standards divert our attention from the root causes of low academic achievement.

Worse, at a time when many schools have fiscal problems and are laying off teachers, nurses, and counselors, and eliminating arts programs, the nation's schools will be forced to spend billions of dollars on Common Core materials, testing, hardware, and software.

Microsoft, Pearson, and other entrepreneurs will reap the rewards of this new marketplace. Our nation's children will not.

Who decided to monetize the public schools? Who determined that the federal government should promote privatization and neglect public education? Who decided that the federal government should watch in silence as school segregation resumed and grew? Who decided that schools should invest in Common Core instead of smaller classes and school nurses?

These are questions that should be asked at Congressional hearings.




Saturday, October 25, 2014

Test mania? President Obama and Education Secretary Duncan want "smarter" testing

Test mania? President Obama and Education Secretary Duncan want "smarter" testing

WASHINGTON, D.C. - President Barack Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan have both backed new efforts to study use of standardized tests in schools and to weed out bad ones, as announced last week by the associations of big-city school leaders and of state superintendents and commissioners.

Both the President and Secretary released statements responding to the announcement by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the Council of the Great City Schools that while both groups believe that some testing is needed to see how much kids are learning, many tests are poorly designed, take too much time, don't measure what schools really need to know and can be eliminated.

It's an issue that has been under increasing debate here in Ohio, particularly as testing time is expected to double for many students this spring when new Common Core tests start.

Here are their statements:

From Secretary Duncan:

As a parent, I want to know how my children are progressing in school each year. The more I know, the more I can help them build upon their strengths and interests and work on their weaknesses. The more I know, the better I can reinforce at home each night the hard work of their teachers during the school day.

The standardized tests my kids take are one gauge on the dashboard, but parents and educators know that tests are not the only indicator.

Last week, state education chiefs and district superintendents announced a plan to examine their assessment systems, ensure that assessments are high-quality and cut back testing that doesn't meet that bar or is redundant. I welcome that important step.

Parents have a right to know how much their children are learning; teachers, schools and districts need to know how students are progressing; and policymakers must know where students are excelling, improving and struggling. A focus on measuring student learning has had real benefits, especially for our most vulnerable students, ensuring that they are being held to the same rigorous standards as their well-off peers and shining a light on achievement gaps.

However, many have expressed concern about low-quality and redundant tests. And in some places, tests — and preparation for them — dominate the calendar and culture of schools, causing undue stress.

Policymakers at every level bear responsibility here — and that includes me and my department. We will support state and district leaders in taking on this issue and provide technical assistance to those who seek it.

To be clear: I strongly believe in using high-quality assessments, including annual tests, as one (but only one) part of how adults improve instruction and hold themselves responsible for students' progress. With my own kids, I know parent-teacher conferences, grades and other feedback round out the picture of whether they're on track.

After a generation of watching other nations surpass ours educationally, the United States is putting the building blocks in place for schools that will once again lead the world. But for this effort to pay off, political leaders must be both strong and flexible in support of the nation's educators.

America's schools are changing because our world is changing. Success in today's world requires critical thinking, adaptability, collaboration, problem solving and creativity — skills that go beyond the basics for which schools were designed in the past. But in recent decades, other countries have retooled their schools faster than we have.

We must do better. A great education isn't just what every parent wants for his or her child; it's a necessity for security in a globally competitive economy.

The good news is that, thanks to the hard work of educators, students and communities, America's schools have made historic achievements in recent years. The U.S. high school graduation rate is at an all-time high, and the places most committed to bold change have made major progress on the nation's report card. Since 2000, high school dropout rates have been cut in half for Hispanic students and more than a third for African Americans. College enrollment by black and Hispanic students has surged.

Perhaps even more important, educators are taking fundamental steps to help reclaim the United States' leadership in education. Throughout the country, students are being taught to higher standards, by teachers empowered to be creative and to teach critical thinking skills. Last year, nearly 30 states, led by both Republicans and Democrats, increased funding for early learning.

Yet change this big is always hard, and political leaders — myself included — must provide support and make course corrections where needed. We are asking a great deal of our educators and students. Despite their hard work, and a growing embrace of many of these changes, one topic — standardized testing — sometimes diverts energy from this ambitious set of changes.

Fortunately, states and districts are taking on this challenge — including places such as Rhode Island and New York state; St. Paul, Minn.; Nashville; and the District, where leaders are already taking actions to limit testing. As they and others move forward, I look forward to highlighting progress others can learn from.

States are also leading the way on improving test quality, building assessments that move beyond bubble tests and measure critical thinking skills and writing; the Education Department has provided $360 million to two consortia of states to support that work. And to reduce stress on teachers during this year of transition, my department in August offered states new flexibility on connecting teacher evaluation to test results.

It's vital that political leaders stand behind changes that will prepare our young people for success in the real world — changes that educators have worked so hard to get underway. We must also stand behind states that have increased standards for learning, and where adults are holding themselves responsible for the progress of all students. We must stand strong for responsible and equitable school funding. We must stand strong for making both preschool and college accessible to all.

And we must stand strong in the knowledge — not the belief but the knowledge — that great schools make a difference in the lives of all children.

From President Obama: 

Over the past five years, my Administration has worked with states to remove obstacles created by unworkable requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act.  While the goals behind No Child Left Behind – promoting school accountability and closing the achievement gap – were admirable, in too many cases the law created conditions that failed to give our young people the fair shot at success they deserve. Too many states felt they had no choice but to lower their standards and emphasize punishing failure more than rewarding success. Too many teachers felt they had no choice but to teach to the test.

That's why my Administration has given states that have set higher, more honest standards the flexibility to meet them.  In that spirit of flexibility, I welcome today's announcement from the Council of Chief State School Officers and the Council of the Great City Schools that state education chiefs and district superintendents will work together to cut back on unnecessary testing and test preparation, while promoting the smarter use of tests that measure real student learning.  I have directed Secretary Duncan to support states and school districts in the effort to improve assessment of student learning so that parents and teachers have the information they need, that classroom time is used wisely, and assessments are one part of fair evaluation of teachers and accountability for schools.

In the 21st century economy, a world-class education is more important than ever.  We should be preparing every child for success, because the countries that out-educate us today will out-compete us tomorrow.  Our nation's schools are on the right track: Our high school graduation rate is at its highest in our history, the dropout rate is the lowest on record, and more of our young people are earning college degrees than ever before.  I'm determined to support our nation's educators and families as they work to set high expectations for our students and for the schools in which they learn.




COMMON CORE TOWN HALL SWLA

Louisiana takes a stand against Common Core. 

Thursday, October 23, 2014

Seven Reasons Why Common Core Repeal in Oklahoma Isn't

Seven Reasons Why Common Core Repeal in Oklahoma Isn't

Before I begin this post, please do not misunderstand; ROPE is/was VERY pleased and honored to have been included in so much of the Oklahoma Common Core repeal bill process. We are very grateful to Representative Nelson and Senator Brecheen for all their work and the many times they sought our input when they certainly needn't have.

That being said, I'm sure no one who contributed to HB3399 expected it to serve as a panacea for all things Common Core in the state. In fact, there were "wish list" items unquestionably discarded during the writing and amending stages due to concerns the bill wouldn't pass or be signed by the Governor - a majority jettisoned due to consternation over the possible loss of Oklahoma's No Child Left Behind Waiver. Though every effort was made to due diligence, without the gift of omniscience, no one could have known the effect of every aspect of the bill's mandates.

HB3399 had a rocky start. The bill wasn't passed by the House and Senate until the last day of the 2014 legislative session. It took 11 days for the Governor to sign the bill, yet the ink from the Governor's pen hadn't dried before a lawsuit was filed over its agreement with the Oklahoma Constitution. Once ruled Constitutionally sound by the Oklahoma Supreme Court, Oklahoma's State Regents for Higher Education began the process of certifying Oklahoma's previous PASS (Priority Academic Student Skills) standards - those mandated for use by the bill - as college and career ready. This action was prescribed in order for Oklahoma to keep its NCLB Waiver by allowing for option "B" (state institutions of higher education must certify state standards as college and career ready, page 14), option "A" having been our original choice = Common Core.

Simultaneously, Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, began issuing threats regarding the security of Oklahoma's NCLB Waiver. In the end, the Regents weren't fast enough for Duncan, and our Waiver was pulled, sparking a veritable mountain of ill-informed media meting out pronouncements of economic and educational ruin for our state. October l7 - approximately 6 weeks after the loss of our NCLB Waiver - the Oklahoma State Regents certify Oklahoma PASS as college and career ready. Following quickly behind this decision, now-deposed State Superintendent Janet Barresi announced the State Department of Education's effort to re-apply for a new NCLB Waiver, with the caveat that a new Waiver could not take effect until the 2015-2016 school year.

Since the beginning of the 2014-15 school year, ROPE has been inundated with emails and messages complaining their schools were continuing to use Common Core despite HB3399. In fact, we received so many messages, we spoke with the bills' authors and our Amicus brief attorneys to create a plan to help empower parents to stop schools from its continued use. Unfortunately, when you have the second largest school district in Oklahoma (Tulsa Public Schools) poking its finger in the eye of parents and the state by proudly proclaiming their use of Common Core, follow the leader becomes an issue. Oklahoma City Public Schools (the largest district in Oklahoma) says they are using a Common Core/PASS hybrid but at least their Kindergarten rubric is based solely on Common Core. Some outlying districts, such as Yukon Public Schools, have just told parents they could care less about their issues with Common Core, they've put the money into training and preparation, and they will continue using Common Core.

So, with all the effort so many of us put into repealing Common Core in Oklahoma, why then has it continued to persist? I think there are at least 7 factors that have thwarted the will of Oklahoma citizens and prevented a full repeal.

1. TEACHER LEADER EFFECTIVENESS (TLE) MODELS (NCLB WAIVER)
For those of you unacquainted with the finer points of the NCLB Waiver, you will note on page 76, the section marked 3a - Develop and Adopt Guidelines for Local Teacher and Principal Evaluation and Support Systems. I could provide a dissertation on this particular issue, but I do not have time here.

Suffice it to say, this is one of four pillars of the federal government's plan to re-make government education utilizing the carrot and stick method provided via the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund grants to states (stimulus dollars 2009), Race To The Top grant applications to states (2010) and the No Child Left Behind Waivers (2011) granted to states to counter the 'emergency' created when Congress refused to re-authorize No Child Left Behind. Unfortunately, the three other pillars (TLE, State Longitudinal Database System and Turning Around Low Performing Schools) work to reinforce Common Core while the grants and waivers urge states to cement each in place. 

In Oklahoma, our Teacher Leader Effectiveness Commission (because government never shrinks) met and decided to use the Tulsa model and the Marzano model for grading our teachers as specified in our Waiver (if we're going to make them get a teaching degree and then make them take a test to be certified to teach and then make them re-certify to teach every five years at a cost of $50.00, and if building principals must observe teachers yearly as part of their building evaluations for continuous employment, is this not a form of overkill?). Both models were to begin use 2014-15 - and they have.

While I have no intimate knowledge of the Tulsa model, I can tell you without question that you cannot possibly score passing on the Marzano model IF YOU DO NOT TEACH COMMON CORE. I received screen shots from the Marzano model - plus an in depth training on the way it works - from an Oklahoma City Public School teacher now on a Plan of Improvement pending firing for not teaching the Common Core and not entering private personal student information into Google Docs (Google has been singled out as direct violators of student privacy) as directed by her Principal.

First of all, the Marzano model is clearly aligned to CCSS:

http://www.marzanocenter.com/Teacher-Evaluation/2014-model/
Secondly, though the entire platform seems endlessly...well...mindless, once you understand how the whole scheme fits together, there is no way this isn't all about Common Core. For example, here is a screenshot of one of the evaluation screens for the way a teacher organizes her classroom.



This looks pretty antiseptic really, until you realize that most books - this teacher must use McGraw Hill Common Core aligned books to teach math - show exactly how to teach Common Core and then dictate specifically what must go on the board in the classroom to make sure the kids are absorbing all their Common Core content concepts. If you don't have the Common Core objective on the board for the day, you are marked down on your evaluations.




Here is an example of the same thing from Yukon Public Schools. 


2. COLLEGE PLACEMENT EXAMS: ACT/SAT


https://www.act.org/commoncore/
The New America Foundation (established by George Soros) has said the following about the ACT:
"Despite the PARCC and SmarterBalance hysteria, the SAT and ACT - along with their remedial placement cousins, ACCUPLACER and COMPASS - are likely to continue to serve as the de facto performance standard for college entry. These assessments are already accepted within higher education, for better or worse, while the Common Core will be greeted with scrutiny and suspicion at many institutions."

So, in other words, "We know Common Core is being discovered and repudiated by the American public, but we must continue to indoctrinate and dumb down American children via the concept that everyone should be exactly the same. We'll just have to do it in backdoor ways to get around them." The ACT/SAT will help do just that. After all, one thing Coleman et al. do apparently understand well, is that seemingly inherent 'necessity' to teach to the test. If the tests that can help you get a college degree have been aligned to Common Core, how can you get into college without learning the Common Core? 


3. ADVANCED PLACEMENT COURSES (AP)

To be filed under the same category as above. You've likely been in a cave if you haven't heard about the push to re-write the US AP History Standards by David Coleman and the College Board. Now, not only will the College Board (David Coleman) continue down the road with their alignment of the SAT to Common Core, but AP courses will also be aligned as well. If we can judge this effort from the new APUSH standards, this will provide a decidedly anti-American spin on coursework along with providing the already identified Common Core shifts from classic literature and study.


4. TESTING VENDORS

As we worked to stop Common Core this year, we were very concerned about language in the bill specifying testing companies. Why? Two reasons: because the amount of personal student data collected by testing vendors is outrageous and because nearly every testing vendor in the known universe is Common Core aligned.



Of course, at its last special session, our State School Board gave the contract for our winter tests to MP. Yes, their website states they can help with "item creation" and "test construction" for "current programs", but their main emphasis is Common Core aligned testing. They were given money by the federal government to do just that. 


A recent EdWeek article outlines how all the large testing vendors are being paid to create Common Core aligned tests. What State School Board is going to take the time to root around for the smaller companies that haven't gotten federal money to create Common Core tests like Iowa? The sheer size and scope of the online testing market works against non-Common Core states.


5. TECHNOLOGY AND THE INTERNET

The largest textbook provider in the world (Pearson) is also one of the largest providers of online Common Core aligned programs. If you're in need of anything related to the Common Core, you have but to go to their one-stop shop - Common Core Solutions - to find solutions to any and ALL your Common Core issues from Professional Development to "Research and Innovation".  Of course there are also Pearson Common Core Webinars for those days when you just want to sit in a chair in your PJ's and learn how to better prepare yourself to teach and learn all things Common Core.


Just for fun, I searched the internet for "Common Core apps" (to use via cell phones and tablets). I came up with at least 26 individual apps aligned to Common Core from Common Core Rap to Common Core Look-fors - which allows teachers to integrate the Common Core State Standards into their classrooms. 


Also for fun, I searched the internet for "Common Core Worksheets". I wound up with pages and pages and pages such as those from Help Teaching and Internet4Classrooms and the super precious, Common Core Kids. Virtually anything you would want Common Core aligned from ELA to Math, can be found in worksheet form from a veritable plethora of education-related websites. 


This is a huge issue for the few states that didn't take Common Core and Oklahoma, who has repealed Common Core. Any teacher at any school, or any administrator at any school, can troll the web and pull down any sort of information for use classrooms on any given day.  For teachers in a pinch - or teachers wanting to teach Common Core and/or being forced to teach Common Core by administrators such as those in Tulsa and Yukon government schools - the supply of classroom materials toward that end is, well, endless.


6. DOE/GATES END-AROUNDING STATES WITH GRANTS TO INSTITUTE/CONTINUE COMMON CORE

Another situation that has stimulated concern, is the fact that the Federal Government is such a willing accomplice in the Common Core re-education plan. For example, the Department of Education began to give Race to the Top grants to school districts in 2013 - outside the pervue of state education departments. 


Bill Gates has given a number of government schools - including Oklahoma's own Tulsa Public Schools - large grants for creating "college and career readiness" (Common Core). In this case, TPS was given a grant last year of nearly 4.5 million dollars to be used over the course of the next five years for the generically termed cause of "Professional Development" - and we now know about that, don't we? 


Then, there's the newest federal government carrot, the "Future Ready District Pledge", which 
"establishes a framework for districts to achieve the goals laid out in President Obama's ConectED Initiative and commits districts to move as quickly as possible toward our shared vision of preparing students for success in college, careers and citizenship."
Correct. The last bit sounds exactly like....Common Core. So, if the feds can get districts - via their superintendents - hooked into this nice new pay for play scheme, they can get money, or re-direct funds, as they need to create this wonderful 'shared vision', that Oklahoma citizens don't really share.


7. TEXTBOOKS

I became a homeschooling mom after my kids started experiencing the effects of Common Core in their classrooms. One of the arguments I made against Common Core early on, was very well stated by small book publisher (Institute For Excellence in Writing), Andrew Pudwa in his testimony before the Oklahoma House Rules Committee.
Additionally, because of the virtual monopoly of textbook publishers (Pearson, McGraw-Hill, Houghton-Mifflin), schools required to conform to the Common Core standards will have little choice when it comes to curricula, and the publishers’ largest customers (California, New York, Florida, and Texas) do have a great input on textbook content. In fact, CCSSI is a huge windfall for education publishers, since most districts in most states are being forced to replace their existing texts with CCSSI conforming texts, and any differentiations by state standards have been superseded by the Common Core standards. Consequently, the big publishers can now sell the same or very similar books to all the states, further increasing profitability. This, of course, makes it even harder for small publishers such as myself to keep a toehold in the public education market. 

How, I posited, can those of us not using Common Core find non-Common Core textbooks? The answer is, "It will be much harder", and for the reasons stated above. 


While individuals can simply utilize online sources to purchase textbooks for home/individual use, government schools require government contracts for such purchases. Smaller book companies cannot sell books at the reduced price sustainable by huge publishers. Districts who frequently howl about lack of funding, are not going to authorize the use of even more of their 'precious' resources on arguably better books. In fact, this is one of the reasons cited by both the TPS Superintendent and the Yukon Public Schools Superintendent (and others) as to why they simply can't 'stop teaching Common Core' - switching to Common Core cost them too much to turn back now.


SOLUTIONS

Let's face it, David Coleman and his Common Core buddies knew what they were doing. They knew if they got enough organizations/education sectors to buy in on the idea of 'national standards' - including the seated administration of the federal government - they could essentially stage a coup over government education in America. And they did just that. 


Today, it appears the future of Common Core must reside in the hands of the parent. Large school districts could simply care less what parents have to say about how their children are educated - and they don't have to. Government schools get government money no matter whether they follow the law or not and no matter whether or not they provide an excellent education for children or not. We MUST break this cycle. We must stop districts from simply being granted taxpayer money from both the federal and state level for no other reason than they claim to be institutions of education, when these dollars are clearly being used to build and defend fiefdoms without care for the public they serve. How else do you explain the fact that government schools have consumed more money while exhibiting diminishing return on investment even here in Oklahoma?


There are several ways to accomplish this task: 

  1. Parents who can, should remove their children from government schools and either put them in private schools or educate them at home or by co-op, removing their child's education funding from the system.
  2. Parents who can't remove their children from government schools should become civilly disobedient and begin to OBJECT to every single program/test/book/questionnaire that offends them, to the point of removing their child on days the offensive material is used/taught and requesting substitute educational materials. Government schools get taxpayer funds from the state when children are in class - they do not when they are not. Parents, use your powers here and don't be bullied by your school YOU are the parent, YOU have the control. Refer to Oklahoma's Parental Bill of Rights should you feel week-kneed in your resolve because of a shaky foundational knowledge.
  3. Legislators should remove the free money supporting government education by allowing the creation of Educational Savings Accounts. ESA's put the funds spent on a child to be educated in the government system back into the hands of the parents to use in the way best for that child. This could be home school, private school or a neighborhood government school. It matters not where the money goes so long as it is used to the benefit of the child's education. The point is that the government school no longer gets a chunk of 'free money' to do with as THEY choose, forcing them, instead to actually have to compete for education dollars.
  4. States currently creating anti-Common Core legislation should take heed of these issues and attempt to address as many of them as possible within.
Until/unless parents/legislators choose to draw clear lines in the sand, government schools will continue to run roughshod over parents, the law and what's best for the education of our children. There is no impetus for them to do otherwise.



Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Federal Government's Role in Education Study Committee

Government's Role in Education


Federal Government's Role in Education Study Committee

HR 550 creates the House Study Committee on the Role of Federal Government in Education. The composition of the committee includes the House Education Committee Chair and the House Higher Education Committee Chair or a person designated by them. It will also include three additional House members, a State Board of Education member, three local superintendents, three teachers, and three parents or grandparents. The purpose of the committee is to study the federal government’s role in public education and whether a recommendation should be made that the United States Department of Education be abolished.

Committee Members:

House MembersSuperintendents
Rep. Brooks Coleman, Co-ChairmanRobert Avossa, Fulton County Superintendent
Rep. Carl Rogers, Co-Chairman Charles Wilson, Bulloch County Superintendent
Rep. Rick JasperseMark Scott, Houston County Superintendent
Rep. Buzz Brockway
Rep. Mike Glanton
TeachersParent/Guardians
Justin Adams, Butts County SchoolsMisty Skedgell, Cobb County
Sarah Ballew Welch, Fannin County SchoolsHubert Parker, Gilmer County
Beth Blakenship, Webster County SchoolsEric Johnson, Lowndes County
State Board of Education
Helen Rice, State Board Chair

Meetings Calendar:

Committee Documents:




Video Archives:



Barge to endorse Wilson?

Barge to endorse Wilson? - Georgia Tipsheet

It appears eminent that Republican State School Superintendent John Barge is planning to endorse the Democratic nominee to succeed him in the office, Valarie Wilson.

Reports begin emerging this morning that the GOPer was planning to join her, and “additional members of the education community,” for what’s been dubbed a “special announcement” tomorrow. That, of course, is generally a synonym for endorsement.

For all intents and purposes, it’s the final nail in the coffin of Barge’s Republican credibility. He abandoned running for re-election to mount a primary challenge to Governor Nathan Deal and could only muster 11 percent of the vote, despite having run and won statewide in 2010. So dismal was Barge’s showing that former Dalton Mayor David Pennington, a neophyte to a statewide campaign, bested him by over 30,000 votes in the primary.

His campaign will, however, live in infamy for infamous declaring Barge to be running for “Govenor” the day he announced.

Barge narrowly squeaked by in the 2010 primary for the open superintendent’s post over Richard Woods, who is the party’s standard bearer for the position this time around. The latter opposes the controversial Common Core education standards; Barge does not.

It’s presumable that this, and other issues, will be the grounds for Barge “crossing party lines” to support Wilson. The centerpiece of his reasoning for challenging Deal was education, too. Polls have shown Woods and Wilson are locked in a closer race than other down ballot contests, especially given that it’s an open seat and neither candidate is familiar to a larger audience.

That said, given Barge’s apparent standing with Republicans these days, one has to wonder how many, if any, voters will be persuaded by the coveted John Barge endorsement.




BLOOMBERG: 'ANDREW CUOMO CONCEDES DEFEAT IN THE COMMON CORE WARS'

BLOOMBERG: 'ANDREW CUOMO CONCEDES DEFEAT IN THE COMMON CORE WARS'

In a column at Bloomberg Politics, David Weigel expresses some amazement that Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY), a “safe Democratic governor,” would join conservatives in the war against the Common Core standards.

   

But, in fact, Cuomo, who has been a staunch supporter of the controversial standards, much to the chagrin of New York State teachers, who don’t like the idea of having their performance ratings contingent in any way on students’ scores on the Common Core aligned tests, has released a new ad (above) for his re-election campaign in which he says he will pledge “not to use Common Core scores for at least five years, and then only if our children are ready.”

Weigel writes that over the summer, he noticed the latest Siena poll that “confounded some left/right stereotypes.”

“When asked if ‘Common Core standards should continue to be implemented,’ a majority of voters said ‘no,’” he stated. “Only 47 percent of Democrats wanted the standards. Independents, who were planning to vote for Cuomo, broke against Common Core by 14 points.”

As Breitbart News reported in July, Weigel wrote at Slate about the poll, “If Common Core can’t make it in New York, can it make it anywhere?”

Weigel notes that the left, at first, laughed at conservatives’ concerns over the Common Core, but then joined forces with them particularly on the point of overtesting children.

“That’s how we ended up with this ad,” he writes, “from a center-left Democrat with heavy labor backing, promising voters that he will slow-walk the education standards that Glenn Beck had warned about first.”

A report by Breitbart News last week showed that the New York governor’s race between incumbent Cuomo and Republican challenger Rob Astorino had become polarized over the issue of the Common Core standards, so much so, in fact, that Astorino, who is adamantly opposed to the education initiative, has secured a “Stop Common Core” ballot line for the November election.

What has likely been very influential in the Cuomo campaign’s decision to release the new ad with the Governor’s “new” position on Common Core is the lack of enthusiasm teachers have demonstrated in voting at all.

The Poughkeepsie Journal reported that Rochester Teachers Association President Adam Urbanski said that while “teachers are very frustrated,” he is inclined to think they will not turn out to vote at all, with Democrat Cuomo not supporting their position against the Common Core standards.

"This is a dilemma. I wouldn't be surprised if most of them did not vote, which is tragic because ... how you bring about change in a democracy is through the ballot box," Urbanski said.

While Cuomo’s ad is likely an attempt to appease teachers and parents, what does it mean for the Common Core standards?

“Governor Cuomo’s ad is an ominous sign for Common Core in New York, as well as for the D.C.-based PARCC [Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers] consortium,” Jamie Gass, director of the Center for School Reform at the Boston-based think tank, Pioneer Institute, told Breitbart News. “Across the country, Common Core is now under fire among both blue and red state parents, while--from Indiana to Florida to Oklahoma--PARCC already has been hemorrhaging state members."

Similarly, anti-Common Core grassroots parent activists Yvonne Gasperino and Glen Dalgleish, told Breitbart News, “The latest Cuomo ad is actually real good news for the Stop Common Core in New York State movement voices across New York State.”

“At the same time, the ad is a slap in the face of the New York State Board of Regents and PARCC, the testing consortium that has been losing a lot of member states of late,” the parents observed. “Cuomo is now getting really concerned that Common Core will have a big impact this election and feels the need to create an ad like this to try to ride the coattails of our activism for the last eighteen months.”

Gasperino and Dalgleish, however, also note the deception in Cuomo’s campaign ad, particularly around the Governor’s statement of his intention to invest $2 billion in education technology.

“The ad is deceptive in that Gov. Cuomo does not set education policy here in New York State,” they continued. “That is the responsibility of the New York State Board of Regents, so his ad is an outright fabrication, a lie to garner votes from Stop Common Core activists and using our children as the emotional tie.”  

“Gov. Cuomo claims to be against the testing, but the $2 billion he wants to invest will cement the PARCC testing, and by default Common Core, into the schools through the ‘Smart Schools Bond Act,’” they added. “This is politics at its worst, at the expense of our children, but it is also a light at the end of the tunnel for those in the trenches as Cuomo is on the retreat.”

As Gary Stern writing at The Journal News reports, the Smart Schools Bond Act, which would allow the state to borrow $2 billion for school technology, will be voted on by New Yorkers on November 4.

“People will see it as free money for their schools,” said Michael Borges, executive director of the New York State Association of School Business Officials. “Who is going to run away from money?”

If the measure is approved by voters, the state would issue bonds and pay them off, but school districts would each get a piece of the pie without having to raise local property taxes.

With Cuomo facing intense pressure over his handling of the Moreland Commission’s corruption investigation, the Smart Schools Bond Act--his pet project--could give his campaign a boost.

Cuomo’s Smart Schools project, however, is also a gift to the technology industry, as observed by Nicholas Tampio, also at The Journal News. A noteworthy member of the Governor’s Smart Schools Commission is Eric Schmidt, the chairman of Google. As Consumer Watchdog reports, Google could likely benefit financially from the program.

“This is not the fox guarding the chicken coop, but rather the fox building the coop,” commented Watchdog.

Additionally, according to a February Breitbart News report, Schmidt was also tapped by Common Core “architect” and current College Board President David Coleman for data support services for his new social justice project called the Access to Rigor Campaign, which is aimed at profiling low-income and Latino K-12 students.

Tampio asserts, as well, that the Smart Schools Bond Act “helps cement the Common Core in New York schools. The technology makes possible the Common Core tests, and the smart schools review board is made up of three individuals who support the Common Core.”





Washington Democrat Group Passes Resolution Opposing Common Core

Washington Democrat Group Passes Resolution Opposing Common Core

The Washington State 46th Legislative District Democrats passed a resolution at their meeting on October 16th opposing the Common Core State Standards.  The group requests that the Washington Legislature withdraw from the Common Core State Standards and reclaim state sovereignty in K-12 education.  I was told the resolution was soundly passed.

Below is the resolution as originally submitted to the body, I’ve not been told about any changes.

Resolution Opposing Common Core State Standards

WHEREAS the copyrighted (and therefore unchangeable) Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are a set of controversial top-down K-12 academic standards that were promulgated by wealthy private interests without research-based evidence of validity and are developmentally inappropriate in the lowest grades; and

WHEREAS, as a means of avoiding the U.S. Constitution’s 10th Amendment prohibition against federal meddling in state education policy, two unaccountable private trade associations–the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO)–have received millions of dollars in funding from the Gates Foundation and others to create the CCSS; and

WHEREAS the U.S. Department of Education improperly pressured state legislatures into adopting the Common Core State Standards and high-stakes standardized testing based on them as a condition of competing for federal Race to the Top (RTTT) stimulus funds that should have been based on need; and

WHEREAS as a result of Washington State Senate Bill 6669, which passed the State legislature on March 11, 2010, the Office of the Superintendent of Instruction (OSPI) adopted Common Core State Standards (CCSS) on July 20, 2011; and

WHEREAS this adoption effectively transfers control over public school standardized testing from locally elected school boards to the unaccountable corporate interests that control the CCSS and who stand to profit substantially; and

WHEREAS the Washington State Constitution also calls for public education to be controlled by the State of Washington through our elected State legislature, our elected State Superintendent of Public Instruction and our elected local school boards; and

WHEREAS implementation of CCSS will cost local school districts hundreds of millions of dollars to pay for standardized computer-based tests, new technology, new curricula and teacher training at a time when Washington is already insufficiently funding K-12 Basic Education without proven benefit to students; and
WHEREAS some states have already withdrawn from CCSS;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we call upon the Washington State legislature and the Superintendent of Public Instruction to withdraw from the CCSS and keep K-12 education student-centered and accountable to the people of Washington State.




Sunday, October 19, 2014

Arne Blows Standardized Smoke

Arne Blows Standardized Smoke

As soon as CCSSO and CGCS announced their non-plan to provide PR coverage for the high stakes test-and-punish status quo, Arne Duncan was there to throw his tooter on the bandwagon. On top of an official word salad on the subject, Arne popped up yesterday in the Washington Post.

There was a time when Duncan could be counted on to at least say the right thing before he went ahead and did the wrong thing. And I cannot fault his opening for the WaPo piece.

As a parent, I want to know how my children are progressing in school each year. The more I know, the more I can help them build upon their strengths and interests and work on their weaknesses. The more I know, the better I can reinforce at home each night the hard work of their teachers during the school day.

He's absolutely correct here. It's just that his words have nothing to do with the policies pursued by his Department of Education.


Duncan welcomes the stated intention "to examine their assessment systems, ensure that assessments are high-quality and cut back testing that doesn’t meet that bar or is redundant."Duncan does not welcome an examination of the way in which standardized testing is driving actual education out of classrooms across America.

He makes his case for standardized testing here:

Parents have a right to know how much their children are learning; teachers, schools and districts need to know how students are progressing; and policymakers must know where students are excelling, improving and struggling.

As a case for standardized testing, this is wrong on all three points.

1) Parents do have a right to know how much their children are learning. And standardized tests are by far the least effective instruments for informing them. They are minute snapshots, providing little or no description of how students are growing and changing. Standardized tests measure one thing-- how well students do on standardized tests.

2) Teachers, schools and districts need to know how students are doing. And if a teacher needs a standardized test to tell her how her students are doing, that teacher is a dope, and needs to get out of teaching immediately. I measure my students dozens of times every single week, collecting wide and varied "data" that informs my view of how each student is doing. A standardized test will tell me one thing-- how that student does with a standardized test. If the school or district does not know whether they can trust my word or not about how the student is doing, the school and district are a dope. Standardized tests offer no useful information for this picture.

3) Explain, please, exactly why policymakers need to know how my third period class is doing on paragraph construction? Why do the bureaucrats in state and federal capitols need to know where students are "excelling, improving and struggling"? Is Congress planning to pass the "Clearer Lesson Plans About the Rise of American Critical Realism Act"? Are you suggesting that there are aides in the DOE standing by to help me write curriculum? Because I cannot for the life of me figure out why the policymakers (nice term, that, since it includes both the legislators who pass policy and the unelected suits who write it for them) need to have standardized results on every single kid in htis country.

Duncan follows this up with a reference to another of his pet theories-- that students with learning disabilities just needed to be tested harder in order to fix their difficulties.

Duncan goes on to admit that "in some places" testing is eating up calendars and stressing students.

Policymakers at every level bear responsibility here — and that includes me and my department. We will support state and district leaders in taking on this issue and provide technical assistance to those who seek it.

In one sense, Duncan is correct. Policymakers at the state and local level bear responsibility for not telling the federal government to take its testing mandates and shove them where the NCLB-based money threats don't shine. Duncan's Department of Education bears responsibility for everything else.

This is the worst kind of weasel wording. This is the kid who sets fire to the neighbors house and then says to the kids who just tried to talk him out of it, "So, we're all in this together, right?"

It was the Duncan/Obama Education Department that twisted every state's arm up behind its ear and said, "If you want your Get Out Of NCLB Free Card, you will make testing the cornerstone of your education system." Duncan does not get to pretend that this testing mania, this out of control testing monster, somehow just fell from the sky. "Gosh," Duncan says and shrugs. "I guess there was just something in the water that year that made everybody just suddenly go crazypants on the testing thing. Guess we'll all have to try harder, boys."

No. No no no no. Testing mania is the direct mandated result of NCLB and its ugly stepsister RttT. It didn't just happen. The federal government required it. And if Duncan really though this was an actual problem and not just a PR problem, he is the one guy who could wave his magic waiver wand and say, "My bad. Your waiver no longer requires you to test everything that moves and use the test results as the basis for all educational system judgments."

I mean-- the states did not just suddenly all say, "You know, wouldn't it be fun to make test results part of teacher evaluations." That was a federal freaking mandate. It was a part of the NCLB based extortion, written into the offer that states could not refuse. NCLB enfederalized high stakes testing, and Race to the Top tripled down on it, and no policymakers outside the beltway ever had a say.

So no, Arne-- you do not get to pretend that "policymakers at every level" are responsible for the test-based gutting of education. Policymakers at your level-- specifically the policymakers who work in your office-- are responsible. All by themselves. No others.

Then it's back to the usual baloney. We've been falling behind educationally for "a generation" (because, kids these days). Dropout rates are down; college enrollment is up (because, you know, college is magic). Educators are taking steps to improve US education, because they are now "empowered to be creative and to teach critical thinking skills" (because creativity and critical thinking were only invented four years ago, and had never before been used in classrooms).

Also-- this whole testing problem is also going to be solved because we totally spent a bunch of free federal money on grants to develop super duper awesometastic tests that will be sooooo much better than current bubble tests (which are apparently not so great, though that has not led to anyone in DC saying, "yeah, you probably shouldn't use those any more"). These tests will be hella amazing and OMGZ-- they will measure writing and critical thinking exactly the same way for every single student in the country. Because if there's one thing we know about critical thinking and good writing, it's that they can always be measured exactly the same way for exactly the same results across the entire population of a country.

At this point I don't know if Duncan is a extraordinary liar or staggeringly clueless. But the WaPo piece ends with this line:

The writer is U.S. secretary of education.

So the piece at least begins and ends with something true. It's only everything in between that is wrong.